Law, Oppression, Focus, Compete, and Ruin

February 5, 2017 10:23 AM

5 Ways Powerful People Trick You Into Hating Protesters. The "system" comes with a number of refined and subtle processes designed to make sure the complaints of the few get ignored by the many. First, all you have to do is ...
posted by blue_beetle (40 comments total)

Flip side: five vulnerabilities that will be effectively used against your protest, so you'd better be prepared for them if you want to win.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 10:56 AM on February 5, 2017 [16 favorites]

Well, there's a lot of truth to all of this.
posted by newdaddy at 11:18 AM on February 5, 2017 [1 favorite]

Yeah, the memory is still fresh in my mind of how these were pulled out for use against Occupy.
posted by JHarris at 11:21 AM on February 5, 2017 [5 favorites]

Yup, saw this happening almost immediately re: the Milo protest at Berkeley. I was defending the rights of the protesters to protest and all I got in response was VIOLENCE IS UNJUSTIFIABLE THEY ARE FREEDOM HATING CRIMINALS. From, of course, a hard-core libertarian who would prefer that we just shout logic at Nazis while they reestablish control through asynchronously violent means.
posted by grumpybear69 at 11:27 AM on February 5, 2017 [17 favorites]

grumpybear69: "Yup, saw this happening almost immediately re: the Milo protest at Berkeley. I was defending the rights of the protesters to protest and all I got in response was VIOLENCE IS UNJUSTIFIABLE THEY ARE FREEDOM HATING CRIMINALS. From, of course, a hard-core libertarian who would prefer that we just shout logic at Nazis while they reestablish control through asynchronously violent means."

Same. Beyond a certain point, I started to feel like the right/libertarian crowd almost seem to view their reality as a sort of Debate Team exercise – it's almost as though they (genuinely) believe that objective truth can be established by forming a more convincing or emotionally-resonant argument.

I'd love to see a "Part 2" to this article to examine ways of effectively countering each of these tactics, because it often feels as though there's absolutely nothing that can be done to fight back. I'd also be interested to learn lessons about how past protest movements have managed to overcome these strategies – Occupy is a tempting example to learn from, although it doesn't seem like they managed to deliver a coherent response to any of the criticisms thrown at them. I'm curious if others managed to find more success...
posted by schmod at 11:35 AM on February 5, 2017 [17 favorites]

The best ones against "Occupy" was "They have no program, who is their leader we can interview, there's nothing new their doing so it's no longer news. But those others were also in the mix.
posted by Obscure Reference at 11:36 AM on February 5, 2017 [3 favorites]

I'd love to see a "Part 2" to this article to examine ways of effectively countering each of these tactics, because it often feels as though there's absolutely nothing that can be done to fight back.

Mood I'm in I almost feel like each bullet point would be "Punch nazi's and DGAF" because all of these tactics are ways to let people on the sidelines continue to ignore things so that the entrenched power can regain control of their institutions.
posted by Navelgazer at 11:57 AM on February 5, 2017 [8 favorites]

Life is the parody, and cracked.com is the serious reporting publication. We have truly fallen through the looking glass.
posted by I-Write-Essays at 12:47 PM on February 5, 2017 [10 favorites]

It's especially difficult because it's not just the rich and powerful who feel this way. The "sensible liberals", who are nominally on the same side as the protesters in many cases, really dislike activists. Especially ones that are right in front of them. Far off protests--say at Standing Rock--well, those are noble and democratic, but protesters in their own town who might offend a friend who's part of the status quo, well, that's another story.
posted by mondo dentro at 1:03 PM on February 5, 2017 [42 favorites]

I don't think this is some information-based strategy that convinces or "tricks" you. I think the hate is already there. I don't think these tactics work if you didn't already have some hate for the group. This isn't how hate is initiated: it is how hate is maintained and manipulated.

Once you're convinced that those other people actually are the facile caricatures presented by our politics or media, you become unmoored and can be led to think and feel whatever "they" want about those caricatures. It works for both sides at the same time: once you are driven by hate, you *are* less than human, at least episodically, and the other side can justify hating you. Hate begets hate.

Leviticus 19:17 is the only remedy I can see, and I'm a strictly secular New Testament kind of guy. You have to be active in *their* communities, and be shown to be something other than a cardboard villain when others start signalling virtue, only to discover that you, tactfully, have none.
posted by the Real Dan at 1:27 PM on February 5, 2017

Large protests are necessary to convince "second amendment types" that armed force or merely a show of such force is futile in the face of the magnitude of the Trump backlash, even though those might not be futile despite that magnitude.

I guarantee you NRA leadership regards its membership as Trump's militia, themselves as the brass of that militia, and will act accordingly.
posted by jamjam at 1:52 PM on February 5, 2017 [8 favorites]

An excellent piece, but can it possibly be true that "today, the only thing most people in China remember about the Tiananmen Square massacre is that it restored stability and order"?

> I don't think this is some information-based strategy that convinces or "tricks" you. I think the hate is already there. I don't think these tactics work if you didn't already have some hate for the group. This isn't how hate is initiated: it is how hate is maintained and manipulated.

This is bullshit, and it's exactly the brand of bullshit that causes progressives to vanish up their own asses. You are succumbing to the tempting fallacy that there are Good People and Bad People, and the Good People (we few, we noble, we heroic ones) automatically know what is right and just and do it, while the others, the Bad People, hate everything that is dear to us and there is no point trying to convince them, all we can do is fight them. And lose, of course, because they are many and we are few, but what a noble fight!

That's bullshit. We're all a weird, unpredictable, ever-changing mix of good and bad, facts and fallacies, and we all sometimes find ourselves in the wrong and have to be convinced of it. I understand the temptation to direct one's rage over Trump and everything he represents at every single person who doesn't instinctively understand how evil he is, but giving in to it is a recipe for futility and self-marginalization. We need to reach out as much as we can, with patience and understanding, and take a break when it gets too much for us. We do not need to mirror the demonization practiced by the Bannons of this world.
posted by languagehat at 2:15 PM on February 5, 2017 [62 favorites]

all of these tactics are ways to let people on the sidelines continue to ignore things

Which, because the whole point of believing these things is so that you can ignore the protests and get on with your day, means that there's no way that the protesters themselves can address this. Literally none, so there's no point in trying to make countering these things a part of a protest.

However, this is exactly the kind of thing that is amenable to person-to-person discussion. If you hear somebody you know use one of these excuses, that's an opportunity to explain why the protest is so important. You don't even have to address the excuse directly, though it's nice if you can. Either way, you've succeeded in forcing them to pay attention to the thing they were trying to ignore. I've been doing this pretty successfully with my mom (who doesn't have terrible politics, but she does get all of her info from TV news and coworkers who are obviously right-leaning).
posted by tobascodagama at 2:41 PM on February 5, 2017 [2 favorites]

I guarantee you NRA leadership regards its membership as Trump's militia, themselves as the brass of that militia, and will act accordingly.

The rank-and-file, yes. The leadership knows damn well that they sold out to the manufacturers years ago and care more about selling firearms than protecting them or their members.
posted by Etrigan at 3:02 PM on February 5, 2017 [4 favorites]

The biggest one the article misses is when people say protests are empirically ineffective, that there are better ways to resolve a conflict than protests. Basically they construct the argument (for example looking at the timing of historical events) that progress happened as a result of policy changes or advocacy, not because of but in spite of protests. So don't waste time, go do something "more constructive", etc.

So I don't know, this is a knowledge gap for me. I'd hope that one's passing familiarity with famous protestors such as MLK or Gandhi would be enough to challenge the notion that protests are useless. Can you even have an empirical "evidence-based" argument about the efficacy of protests? Because that seems like the meta-controversy, that some people are not just skeptical of the value of protests but completely closed-minded to it. I wonder what various scientists/historians/researchers say about this.
posted by polymodus at 3:18 PM on February 5, 2017 [4 favorites]

From, of course, a hard-core libertarian who would prefer that we just shout logic at Nazis while they reestablish control through asynchronously violent means.

Hordes of liberals on my FB as well.

As a radical friend put it: "I'm sure glad all those online petitions in the 40s defeated the Third Reich".
posted by ryanshepard at 3:38 PM on February 5, 2017 [16 favorites]

> You are succumbing to the tempting fallacy that there are Good People and Bad People, and the Good People (we few ...

Maybe you didn't get past my first paragraph?

>.. the Bad People, hate everything that is dear to us and there is no point trying to convince them..

I'm pretty sure I said exactly the opposite of that, LanguageHat.
posted by the Real Dan at 3:47 PM on February 5, 2017

I'd hope that one's passing familiarity with famous protestors such as MLK or Gandhi would be enough to challenge the notion that protests are useless. Can you even have an empirical "evidence-based" argument about the efficacy of protests?

I think this evades a lot of issues, though. Yes, MLK and Gandhi changed things. But the anti-Iraq War protests, the protests against the WTO, the protests against Walker in Wisconsin ... those didn't do anything. Pointing at protests that worked as evidence that *your* protest will work is like pointing at revolutions that worked as proof that we should have a second civil war.
posted by steady-state strawberry at 3:50 PM on February 5, 2017 [7 favorites]

... which isn't to say they CAN'T work, nor even that YOUR protest can't work. But it is to say that the effectiveness varies a lot, depending upon the context, and so "why are you disrupting my day for this?" isn't the historically ignorant question some want it to be.
posted by steady-state strawberry at 3:53 PM on February 5, 2017 [3 favorites]

I am deeply thankful to recent protesters. For a variety of reasons I can't do it myself, but I feel a great deal of gratitude to those who can.

This kind of sentiment is something I've seen a lot more recently. So maybe these protests will be effective.
posted by poe at 6:34 PM on February 5, 2017 [3 favorites]

The fact that he talks about dismissal of men's rights activists in #3 and men falsely accused of rape in #2 makes me uncomfortable, and this is totally David Wong's genius. It's designed to break down the defenses of white guys who "hate SJWs" and convince them of Wong's fairness while winning them over (it doesn't hurt that he's another white guy, too). It reminds me of the recent FPP that talked about rhetorical strategies liberals can use to win over conservatives. I know I'm explaining the obvious here, but I really admire it.
posted by thetortoise at 6:37 PM on February 5, 2017 [12 favorites]

Cracked is Teen Vogue for guys.
posted by irisclara at 7:30 PM on February 5, 2017 [12 favorites]

I think this evades a lot of issues, though. Yes, MLK and Gandhi changed things. But the anti-Iraq War protests, the protests against the WTO, the protests against Walker in Wisconsin ... those didn't do anything. Pointing at protests that worked as evidence that *your* protest will work is like pointing at revolutions that worked as proof that we should have a second civil war.

... which isn't to say they CAN'T work, nor even that YOUR protest can't work. But it is to say that the effectiveness varies a lot, depending upon the context, and so "why are you disrupting my day for this?" isn't the historically ignorant question some want it to be.

Well the point is to get people who are closed-minded to the value of protests to, e.g., consider the historical facts of MLK and Gandhi. Efficacy, disruption, context, and other similar abstract concepts are themselves politically contextualized; people use them as loaded terms as part of ideological and propagandistic discourse, creating an illusion of neutral language. That's where the ignorance is located; it's in that sense that their question contains hidden assumptions. Framing protest phenomena as merely a matter of efficacy is itself a problematic evaluative stance, because who gets to define failure?

For example, arguing that "MLK's protest was then and yours is now" is conveniently forgetting that people do things to set an example so that others can participate and learn. In MLK's writings he makes it clear that it wasn't just about him, or his time period. So today that becomes an ideological example of how people today attempt to reason or philosophize about activism.

The meta-issue is that many actual, real people think and say that all protests are bad/useless/dangerous. I wonder that this is only a trend that will increase. The question there is developing an account for why it's happening.

What I'm saying is that, the nature of protests is still an open question. We lack the concepts to even begin to talk about protests were successful and what weren't; what even are a set of neutral, scientifically consistent metrics for that? There are bits and pieces of the general discussion, from literature, art, history, social sciences, STEM, and of course some popular/mainstream books such as by Steven Pinker: protests are a social phenomenon deserving of proper scholarship, inquiry, and explanation. Meanwhile, it is what it is; people are going to do it.
posted by polymodus at 8:09 PM on February 5, 2017 [2 favorites]

The "sensible liberals", who are nominally on the same side as the protesters in many cases, really dislike activists.

Here's the thing though. #1: I don't want to live in a violent left-wing autocracy any more than i want to live in a right-wing one. #2: I don't like seeing folks on my end of the political spectrum actively inciting stuff and making it worse -- they're trying to make it a choice between extremes just like Bannon is, and I'm uninterested in playing that game.

The other problem with even small incidents of violence getting publicized is that they suppress turnout at subsequent protests. I had a ton of first-time-protester friends who were hesitant about the women's march for fear the Black Bloc would show up and start something and they'd get caught in it. Are numbers important? (And they are -- 3.5% of the population in the streets will topple a dictator.) Then you want to reinforce the positive vibe that pervaded the Women's March, not scare people off.

And for Milo protests in particular, he is a provocateur and wants attention. He has learned that he can get tremendous amounts of attention by provoking certain parts of the left. The protesters are playing right into his hands by shutting him down. Instead of a small audience for a dull speech in the student center, his bullshit gets talked about nationwide on Fox News. Congratulations! Great Job! Want to stop Milo? Ignore him. He'll have an extinction burst, so be ready to ignore that too.

This isn't something I'd advocate in the face of all right-wing authoritarian threats btw. Protest the shit out of Trump. He's a malignant narcissist and wants to be loved -- evidence that he's hated and mocked hurts him. Tailor the response to the psychology of the individual.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 9:42 PM on February 5, 2017 [11 favorites]

Chris Floyd's written a pretty righteous takedown of Lee Fang (of The Intercept), who tweeted over the weekend that: "Lefty riots in 1968 gave us Nixon, LA riots gave us the 1994 Crime Bill, riots over a message board troll will help Trump win reelection." Floyd writes in response:

I don’t agree with “Black Bloc” tactics — not least because the “Bloc” is obviously riddled with informants and provocateurs. But I don’t think fascists should be treated with kid gloves either. We’re talking about people who, like Yiannopoulos, are openly, adamantly intent on causing real harm to actual human beings. It’s not an abstract debate. It’s not a game. It’s not reality TV. These ugly, hate-oozing fascists mean business; and by god, so should we.

Chris Floyd, Historical Ignorance, Spineless ‘Dissent’: The Dangers of Decorous Resistance, CounterPunch (6 February 2017).
posted by Sonny Jim at 3:51 AM on February 6, 2017 [4 favorites]

This isn't something I'd advocate in the face of all right-wing authoritarian threats btw. Protest the shit out of Trump. He's a malignant narcissist and wants to be loved -- evidence that he's hated and mocked hurts him. Tailor the response to the psychology of the individual.

Though, in the words of Chuck D., “the suckers have authority”.

Nixon fraudulently escalated the Vietnam War and introduced the War On Drugs, which is still going strong, just to punish the younger generation and the civil rights movement for their insolence. When faced with a Berlin whose residual cosmopolitanism made it less than ablaze with Nazi zeal, Albert Speer's answer was to flatten the place and replace it with an oversized fascist capital named Germania, annihilating all traces of its problematic former culture. It remains to be seen what Trump/Bannon's vengeance for those who fail to fall into line will be, but it will assuredly be harsh.
posted by acb at 4:10 AM on February 6, 2017 [5 favorites]

Jack and Bobby condemned the Freedom Riders.
posted by whuppy at 6:38 AM on February 6, 2017

I started to feel like the right/libertarian crowd almost seem to view their reality as a sort of Debate Team exercise – it's almost as though they (genuinely) believe that objective truth can be established by forming a more convincing or emotionally-resonant argument

This nails it. Absolutely nails it. With nails.
posted by flabdablet at 7:46 AM on February 6, 2017 [3 favorites]

As I am learning, protests are one of a variety of methods. Strikes are far more effective.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 8:05 AM on February 6, 2017 [1 favorite]

Strikes are far more effective.

So is voting people out of office, but there's also the "possibility" axis that you have to consider. Strikes are far more effective, but they're also far riskier than protests.
posted by Etrigan at 8:11 AM on February 6, 2017 [1 favorite]

And for Milo protests in particular, he is a provocateur and wants attention. He has learned that he can get tremendous amounts of attention by provoking certain parts of the left. The protesters are playing right into his hands by shutting him down.

Milo reportedly going to name names of undocumented students at his UC appearance--which was going to be livestreamed on Breitbart. He has previously done something like that to a transgender student. He is not a mere troll. He intends to harm people.
posted by LindsayIrene at 9:17 AM on February 6, 2017 [18 favorites]

Not that it would stop people like Trump from painting every protester with the same brush, but it would help to continually acknowledge that this anarchist "Black Bloc" is a ridiculous bunch of self-important assholes who are making it harder to have Nice Things. Obviously there have been documented cases of infiltrators and plants, but there really are people who've decided that their right to get mad and blow off some testosterone > your right to have an unbroken window. People deciding that's ok leads to a whole host of other problems. Speaking out against these dummies as a lefty doesn't mean you agree with Trump. I knew some of the bulldozer-sabotaging types back when I worked for environmental causes. It's just one long facepalm with those folks. And frankly, busting stuff up is just a thrill - they don't really think it's going to bring down the system. It's more that they've run out of Mr. Robot episodes.

However, Milo is an idiot. Probably a better-known idiot now - before the Berkeley thing, I bet you could walk into any restaurant anywhere and be likely to get 0% name recognition, but now my Facebook feed has him all over it. And the dialogue I'm seeing is not "yeah! he deserved it!"
posted by freecellwizard at 10:20 AM on February 6, 2017 [3 favorites]

The White House and Fox join forces to undermine anti-Trump protests as violent and fake
posted by LindsayIrene at 11:36 AM on February 6, 2017

Framing protest phenomena as merely a matter of efficacy is itself a problematic evaluative stance, because who gets to define failure?

The Iraq War happened. Walker steamrolled Wisconsin. In both cases, protests failed. And I feel like I have as good a claim as any to judge the effectiveness of the protests: I was there. As for why some worked and others didn't -- a quick google comes up a few professors who specialize in protests, so I'm pretty sure that there's a body of literature on the subject.
posted by steady-state strawberry at 11:36 AM on February 6, 2017

Are we to limit ourselves to actions that will be approved of by low-information Facebookers, then?
posted by LindsayIrene at 11:49 AM on February 6, 2017 [5 favorites]

Framing of "effectiveness" without mentioning eight years of Tea Party astroturfing that covered everything from the ACA to truther and birther conspiracy theories seems like an obvious bias. They "rally." We "protest" or "riot." They show up to town halls and "just ask questions." We "disrupt."

Everything the LGBTQ community has achieved in my lifetime has been by virtue of a multidisciplinary activist movement that included protest, direct action, and civil disobedience (alongside lawsuits, boycotts, economic advocacy, and support systems.) And yes, at every action there will be some asshole with a camera fixed on the minority of queens, dykes, and fairies as examples of why we should be ignored. This is not a new debate.

I'm reading both Hidden Figures and The Third Reconstruction this month, and I think Barber likely knows what he's doing in threatening lawsuits, calling for a boycott, and calling people to march with him this weekend. What doesn't get mentioned in the movie are the complex interactions of legal, political, and protest actions that created the NACA/NASA West Computing Group.
posted by CBrachyrhynchos at 1:35 PM on February 6, 2017 [5 favorites]

Potomac Avenue: "Strikes are far more effective."

The GOP shutdown the federal government in a hissy fit. I'm skeptical of the effectiveness of a strike even if you could get a reasonable turn out.
posted by Mitheral at 5:35 PM on February 6, 2017

it would help to continually acknowledge that this anarchist "Black Bloc" is a ridiculous bunch of self-important assholes who are making it harder to have Nice Things

...with the occasional joyous exception.
posted by flabdablet at 8:40 PM on February 6, 2017 [3 favorites]

I think if you want to disrupt someone awful, mockery and funny noises should always be an option. Screaming Chickens are 60 cents with free shipping on aliexpress, electric fart sound machines are like 5 bucks on ebay.
posted by gryftir at 6:15 AM on February 7, 2017 [1 favorite]

this anarchist "Black Bloc" is a ridiculous bunch of self-important assholes who are making it harder to have Nice Things

"Black bloc" is a protesting tactic, not a group of people, and in the case of the UCB protests, was a significant part of what successfully stopped the event from occurring.
posted by cwill at 2:33 PM on February 7, 2017 [3 favorites]